Last year after the first “tea parties” were held on Tax Day, 51% of Americans had a favorable view of the Tea Party (“TP”). According to Rasmussen, this year, that number went down by 10 points. Now 41% of polled voters have a favorable opinion of the TP, while 35% view it unfavorably — 23% are undecided. The Rasmussen also informed us that male voters are more likely to have a favorable opinion of the TP than female voters but there are many, many female Tea Partiers (“TPiers”) and we know that 70% of Republicans view the TP favorably.

Voters also said that if the Tea Party was organized as a political party, 34% would prefer a Democrat in a three-way congressional race; 27% would vote Republican and 21% say they would vote for the TP.

After doing a tremendous amount of research I came to the conclusion that the TP doesn’t have any real set of guidelines, long-term goals or realistic solutions that defines it as a group. On the other hand they have a few beliefs in common that make them unite when it’s opportune.

TP members say that they want to “take back” America! They say that America is heading in the wrong direction and we need to take control and fix it before it is too late. Bu they don’t say specifically what they want to fix. The rhetoric sounds damn persuasive and even more terrifying. It has many Americans frightened, anxious, enraged and ready to wage war!

TPiers believe that the federal government is a special interest group and that government and big business work together in ways that hurt consumers and investors. Of course there was no TP before President Barack Obama. This contradicts their insistence that it’s really all about big government since big government didn’t bother them when George W or any other person was president.

The TPiers won’t commit to what part(s) of big government they would get rid of to create a small government. Do the TPiers want to get rid of Student Loans, Federal Education Funding, Job Corp, Public Transportation, Social Security, Medicaid or Medicare or any of the many government programs that build our roads, highways and bridges or the programs that protect our food supply, etc.? These are the things that ‘big government’ does. If our government isn’t responsible for these big issues that the majority of all Americans benefit from, who is going to create, fund and manage these programs? The TP doesn’t have an answer. They seem to be only interested in throwing random thoughts into the wind where they leave the thoughts…floating aimlessly…with no solutions.

TPiers are only interested in the economic state of our nation, not any of America’s social issues, unless, it’s something they don’t like such as: welfare, abortion, or gay and lesbian (GLBT) rights. The Republican Party candidate for Senate in Nevada, Sharron Angle, said, “And these programs that you mentioned — that Obama has going with Reid and Pelosi pushing them forward — are all entitlement programs built to make government our God. And that’s really what’s happening in this country, is a violation of the First Commandment. We have become a country entrenched in idolatry, and that idolatry is the dependency upon our government. We’re supposed to depend upon God for our protection and our provision and for our daily bread, not for our government.” TPiers wants us to believe that if we lose our jobs because of the Republican-caused economic crisis, or if we lose our house because of the Republican-backed bank fraud, or if we can’t afford health care insurance because Republicans blocked the public option, don’t worry; the government won’t have to help you because God will provide.

TPiers also allege that they are being painted as extremists, which they say they are not when they are in their smaller social club group. But they agree that when they come together and have joint meetings of different sects from different cities and states they are extreme in their vocalizations and outrage.

What is puzzling is that even politicians that owe their nominations to the TP tend to shy away from admitting to being a part of it. For example, here in the great State of Florida, Marco Rubio the Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate said, “I think there is a real misunderstanding about what the Tea Party movement is. The Tea Party movement is a sentiment in America that government is broken – both parties are to blame – and if we don’t do something soon, this exceptional country will be lost and it will become just like everybody else.”

It seems that politicians use the TP to gain campaign funds and the nomination and then discard or distance them self from the TP in order to reconnect with mainstream voters. This is a very shrewd strategy! This strategy allows politicians like Rubio to tap into the ranting and raving of the TP without them self having to look or sound angry or extreme – they can blame the rage and disorderliness on their TP audiences. How incredibly conniving of mainstream Republicans!

How is this even possible? How can an ideological group that is only 18 month old allow mainstream politicians that do not support their beliefs to manipulate them and dispose of them so blatantly?! It seems that greed may be the answer.

Some TP leaders are thinking about their personal futures and are trying to find a way into mainstream politics. Yes, they want to be a part of the same big government that they loathe and preach against daily. TP leaders are involving themselves in the more traditional American political scene. From before the primaries and now as the mid-term elections draws closer, some tea party groups seem to have aligned themselves with one candidate or another and these alignments are changing the nature and character of the TP. Many TP sects are seeing a shift in their focus. They are moving from being ideologically linked groups of people who want to advance an ideal, to being candidate focused groups that are participating in the infighting between generally like-minded candidates. The thing is the TP leadership doesn’t want their activists or supporters to know that there is bickering and infighting in their ranks.

So back to my original question, “Is the “Tea Party” good for America?”

In a civic sense I believe that answer is yes because the TP has engaged and encouraged citizens to involve themselves in maintaining the good order of our fair republic – just as the country’s Founders envisioned it.

From a constructive, helping America to be all she can be point-of-view – my answer is a resounding no. Their candidates are erratic and are on the fringe of one extreme or another. They are not unifiers. They are dividing America with hostilities. The TP has not brought anything new to the table. They have no solutions and their political naiveté is worrisome. Simply put, they are obstructionists.

Initially I thought the Tea Party was a noble movement of independent free thinking spiritual people from all walks of life. What I have discovered during my research is that the TP could just as well become a neo-Nazi type party if they are not contained.

We cannot sit idly by and watch a few ‘non-thinkers’ without solutions take over the American political system. It seems to me that those who know do not speak and those who speak do not know. If ‘thinkers’ do not unite and make our voices heard we will all have to live with the decisions that the ‘non-thinkers’ made and it will be our own fault.

Keep your eyes on the prize — vote on Tuesday, November 2 and Early Vote if it’s an option in your State!!!

When you are the leader in anything (even on Dancing with the Stars!) there is only one way to go – down. And there are always many happily waiting to take you top spot. America is the world leader and there are many ‘vultures’ who want us to slip so that they can be the world leader – number one. As the lyricist Des’ree said, “You gotta be bad, you gotta be bold, you gotta be wiser, you gotta be hard, you gotta be tough, you gotta be stronger, you gotta be calm and you gotta stay together!”

America – we MUST stay together. We MUST unite or divided we will all fall. The rest of the world is uniting against us. Wake up! Unite!!! Did you hear or read the news report on Thursday that Russia is helping to build a nuclear power station?! Read the following articles for details:

Most Americans want what’s good for America – we just have different ways we believe we should go about making America successful. What we seem to forget is that there are more than one way to skin a cat, a deer or a gator.

If we continue to fight amongst ourselves as we are doing now, NONE of us will benefit. Right now we are like a nation at a four way traffic intersection and we all moved at the same time. We are all in the middle of the intersection and no one wants to back up so we are all stuck. And everyone behind us is stuck and we’re backed up for miles without a solution in sight.

The top 10% of America has 90% of our wealth. That 10% is receiving tax breaks from our government so that they will create good jobs in America and put us back to work. But that’s not what they are doing. They are taking the tax breaks and shipping tens of thousands of good paying jobs overseas. This means that the top 10% are getting our tax monies from the government and they are getting more money by shipping our jobs abroad and saving millions. Why do the 10% wealthiest get to have their billion dollar cake and eat it too? Why aren’t we screaming at them?

We have to look at who the real culprits are and rebel against THEM. President Obama is giving these big businesses the tools they need to hire Americans. These businesses have accepted the tools but they refuse to use it to help the middle class Americans they are suppose to help. They are lining their pockets and sitting on their money eggs while we lose our jobs.

America we have to unite against big business and we have to unite as a country before we drop from number one to number three or four.

We have to be smart citizen politicians. We have to make decisions that help us; not the 10%. We have to realize that the only way to rebuild America is for all of us to work together and get America out of the hole we’re in. When we’re out of the hole we can debate our doctrines and personal preferences.

If we do not remain united, foreign powers will have a real opportunity to slip in and take bits and pieces of our country and businesses until they own America. Is that what we want to happen?

We can only point the fingers at ourselves if this great country collapses.

This is not the time to snicker, bicker and point fingers. Know is the time to set America right so we can continue to live in this great country as Americans and not become foreigners in our country.

So, what are you going to do? Are you going to vote and unite America on November 2, 2010 and continue the work already started so we can all get jobs again? Or are you going to vote to further divide the country and we will all fall?

United we stand. Divided we fall.

What are you going to do?

If America fails, which country do you want to rule America? Which new language do you want to have to learn to speak? Chinese, Russian, French?

This is such a great and responsible position to have. But I’m sorry Mr. President, our ROTUS’s salary should be much, much more that $36,000!

Our ROTUS has to be someone who is personable, educated, VERY reliable, trustworthy, a good communicator and has to dress in a respectable manner since a major part of her responsibility is meeting and greeting heads of states and dignitaries. I understand that this is a privilege and I know Ms. Page loves her job (and she might not be complaining) but $36,000 is not a reasonable salary for this position!

“Have you met ROTUS?” This is a question President Obama has taken to asking some of his visitors to the White House. In a bureaucratic world awash in abbreviations and acronyms, this one in particular seems to amuse him.

Mr. Obama, of course, is POTUS (president of the United States). Michelle Obama is FLOTUS (first lady of the United States). And the title of ROTUS (receptionist of the United States) is worn by Darienne M. Page.

“This is the receptionist of the entire United States,” Mr. Obama said, introducing Ms. Page to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.

“How long was your confirmation hearing?” Mr. Holder asked with a smile.

“You want to say, ‘Hello, POTUS,’ ” Ms. Page said later, recalling her interactions with Mr. Obama, who picked up the ROTUS nickname from young aides and now uses it nearly every time he sees her. “But then you say, ‘Hello, Mr. President.’ ”

Ms. Page presides over the beehive of activity that is the West Wing lobby of the White House. At 27, she is among the hundreds of young aides who help the new administration tick. But her vantage point offers a considerably closer view of this presidency than most of them.

She is on hand to greet nearly every official visitor who has an appointment with the president or his top advisers. She oversees the front of the house at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, serving coffee to former Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain, making small talk with a delegation from Kazakhstan and trying to chew a mouthful of almonds quickly before saying hello to Tiger Woods as he stands at her desk.

“I tried not to be very star-struck,” Ms. Page said of the golfer’s recent visit. “I’m usually not, but I was caught completely off guard. All of the people that come in, I think, are humbled by the office, so they are all very nice.”

Last week alone, the list of visitors ranged from Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell, the Democratic and Republican leaders of the Senate, to the actors Owen Wilson and Ben Stiller, in town for the domestic premiere of their movie, “Night at the Museum: Battle at the Smithsonian,” at the Smithsonian’s Air and Space Museum.

Ms. Page tries to memorize the faces of the senators and representatives who come to the White House. But after a guest passes through the security gate on the North Lawn, she has approximately five minutes to do a Google search if they are unfamiliar, all so she can make small talk during their inevitable wait.

The White House, at least the portion of it where the president’s official business is conducted, is smaller than it looks on television. If the three sofas and half-dozen chairs in the West Wing lobby are filled, visitors must stand as if they were in a waiting room at a busy doctor’s office — although one with better artwork, like the 1861 oil painting “Cannonading on the Potomac” by Wordsworth Thompson that hangs above the receptionist’s desk.

“Hi, how can I help you?” Ms. Page said in greeting a visitor on a recent morning as men and women in business suits milled around. “Are you here for Nancy? You can have a seat.”

For her $36,000-a-year salary, Ms. Page schedules all the activity in the Roosevelt Room, just steps from the Oval Office, and in the Wardroom Room, which is outside the White House mess hall. Even with a dawn-to-dusk schedule, the meetings often run overtime, creating a logjam that she is left to contend with.

One sign of a busy day? An ever-growing pile of BlackBerrys and cell phones.

The Roosevelt Room is secure, so she must collect all personal electronic devices at the door. She uses yellow Post-it notes to write the last name of the owner on each device before placing it in a wicker basket on her desk, next to a vase of fresh flowers that is rotated at least every three days.

Her path to the White House began in a bar in downtown Chicago, where she and a group of friends from the University of Illinois stopped by for happy hour and dinner one night in fall 2007. A man in a “Veterans for Obama” shirt was sitting nearby, and they began talking about the campaign. Soon, she was a volunteer. A few months later, she was hired to work in the operations department to make travel arrangements and handle logistics for campaign field workers and senior strategists.

“You can tell a lot about a person’s temperament based on how they travel and what they’re willing to take and what they’re not willing to take,” Ms. Page said. “It helps dealing with them now.”

This is her first White House job, but Mr. Obama is the second president she has served. The first was George W. Bush, her commander in chief when she was an Army sergeant stationed in Iraq.

Ms. Page joined the military after finishing high school in Maryland, following a long line of others in her family. She worked as a paralegal in Baghdad, taking depositions in the Abu Ghraib prison. She still wears a metal bracelet on her right wrist inscribed with the name of Sgt. Maj. Cornell W. Gilmore, her commander, who was killed when enemy fire struck his helicopter in late 2003.

“He taught us to lead, but to lead with a smile and be calm under pressure,” she said. “A lot of lessons that I learned in the Army help me here. There is a lot that goes on that I have to do with a smile even if I really don’t want to.”

A task that requires particular diplomacy is overseeing the presidential boxes at the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. A few days a week, she goes to pick up tickets and checks to be sure that the V.I.P. seats in all three theaters are in order and that the minibar is stocked with small bottles of Korbel champagne, white boxes of M&Ms with the presidential seal on them and a few cans of Bud Light.

The next challenge? “The Color Purple” is playing this summer, and requests far exceed the number of seats at Ms. Page’s disposal. As she walks down the center’s grand hallway, where coming performances are advertised, another worry pops into her mind.

IT’S invariably the little things, the unconsidered, off the cuff, in passing, unrehearsed things that snag our attention, and seem to be telling of the bigger things.

In the case of Barack Obama’s first visit to London and the Group of 20 conference to save the endangered habitat of bankers and real estate salesmen, it was the handshake with the bobby that seemed to be emblematic. In a forest of waving palms, this handshake meant more.

As the president stepped up to 10 Downing Street, he leant over, made eye contact, said something courteous, and shook the hand of the police officer standing guard. There’s always a police officer there; he is a tourist logo in his ridiculous helmet. He tells you that this is London, and the late 19th century. No one has ever shaken the hand of the policeman before, and like everyone else who has his palm touched by Barack Obama, he was visibly transported and briefly forgot himself. He offered the hand to Gordon Brown, the prime minister, who was scuttling behind.

It was ignored. He was left empty-handed. It isn’t that Mr. Brown snubbed the police officer; he just didn’t see him. To a British politician, a police officer is as invisible as the railings.

But the rest of us noticed. Because in this country that still feels the class system like a phantom limb, being overtly kind to servants is the very height of manners, the mark of true nobility. Being nice to the staff is second only to being nice to dogs as a pinnacle of civilization. Remember: a butler’s not just for Christmas. Apparently, the Obamas searched every cupboard and closet in Downing Street to personally thank all the servants for looking after them. That’s classlessly classy.

You often wonder what visiting dignitaries make of your country; American presidents must think that the whole world is in a constant state of riot. Wherever they go, CNN is full of angry banners, burning flags and tear gas. I went and joined the London riot. It was depressingly flabby, and half-hearted. Not so much a demonstration as a queue of arcane special pleading groups, ranging from anarchists for bicycles (who all waited politely at the traffic lights) and one-world vegans. Altogether, they looked like a collective of European street mimes.

A couple of broken windows and teeth, and that was it. The London police have discovered that the best way to neuter demonstrations is not to move everyone on, or disperse troublemakers, but hold them close, cordon them into a diminishing space for hours and hours, as a sort of arbitrary al fresco arrest. The crowd goes from righteous indignation to fury to despair, and ends up pleading. They’re all desperate to go. Its crowd control by bladder control: effective butprobably illegal.

The Obamas were likely also surprised at how black the old white colonial country is. Ethnic diversity is shamelessly and embarrassingly pushed to the front of every publicity shot. Michelle Obama went to a girl’s school where a gospel song was performed and where she made a surprisingly moving speech. All the world leaders’ wives are herded together in cultural outings of excruciatingly bland probity, but Mrs. Obama rose above it, and seemed to really inspire this group of young girls. It was noticed. The rest of the women grinned and clutched their handbags, apparently wondering when they could get away to Harrods.

The other thing that she rose above was Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip: Honey, we shrunk the royal family. If ever we needed a totemic image of the merits of a republic over a monarchy, this was it.

Of all the G-20 wives, Carla Bruni, a k a Mrs. Nicolas Sarkozy, was noticeably absent. With her carefully demure wardrobe and the fluttered eyes of a reformed and legitimized mistress, she was too canny to let her herself be compared to those dumpy other halves. It left one dying to see what Jackie O.-type manipulation would go down when the Obamas crossed the Channel for the NATO summit meeting.

The French are never happy coming to London; this is an ancient and comforting enmity. President Nicolas Sarkozy of France plays nicely to our patronizing stereotypes. He is a small man, a Gallic in lifts who can’t hide the puffed-up, tip-toe insecurities of his shortness. Almost as if he wanted the world to think he has Napoleon syndrome, he postured and pouted and made arbitrary demands, and drew lines in the sand.

The truth is that the French have never really got over being dumped at the altar of the “special relationship.” It should have been them. It was after all, the French who gave you the Statue of Liberty and the keys to the Bastille and who think Jerry Lewis is funny. What did the English ever give you? Muffins and a burnt White House.

The Germans, too, might have imagined a tighter partnership. In terms of ancestry, America is a far more German country than an Anglo-Saxon one, and they have the biggest economy in Europe. Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany and Mr. Sarkozy made a joint statement that they would categorically veto any further bailouts or attempts to spend our way out of debt, and then a mere 24 hours later they were beaming and shaking hands over an extra trillion-dollar binge.

The salutary fact is that when you look at the grinning group photograph, there is only one face you want to see. This conference was about saving the world, but more important for the participants, it was about saving their political lives. Mr. Obama is the only popular politician left in the world. He would win an election in any one of the G-20 countries, and his fellow world leaders will do anything to take home a touch of that reflected popularity.

We may be in the rare position of having an American president who has a deeper mandate among people who could never vote for him than with those who did. For the time being, he has only to offer his hand, and ask politely.

Police in riot gear stand outside a Royal bank of Scotland branch. Thousands of demonstrators converged on London’s financial district on chanting “abolish money” and “storm the banks” in a heavily policed protest to coincide with the G20 summit of world leaders.

Sir Fred was fired last fall when RBS was forced to beg the English taxpayers for billions of pounds in a bailout. The bank’s new chairman, Sir Philip Hampton said that the pension plan is legally stipulated by Sir Fred’s contract but no “stone is being left unturned” to see if it can be overturned.

RSB’s purchase of Dutch rival ABN Amro in 2007 was catastrophic the bank and weighed it down with billions of pounds of sub-prime assets. Sir Fred and the bank have been the focus of public anger as the banking crisis continues to send the British economy into deeper recession.

The International Monetary Fund has received super financial powers at the G20 meetings and it seems to me that we might be on our way to a New World Financial Order.

Let me say that I am not a financial whiz by ANY stretch of the imagination. I’m just reading between the lines and trying to explain what I see with my limited financial vocabulary. If you’re a financial expert and see any mistakes I made I would appreciate it if you let me know.

The IMF is a group of 185 countries who contribute money to a ‘pool’ and members can borrow from the pool on a temporary basis.All UN member countries contribute to the IMF except for Taiwan, North Korea, Cuba, Andorra, Monaco, Liechtenstein, Tuvalu, and Nauru.The IMF was set up in 1944 to help countries who get into short-term financial crises because they don’t have enough currency to pay their bills — it offers short-term loans to help those countries get through financially difficult times.

Like the financial bailouts here in America, if you have to borrow from the IMF then you give up some of your independence and power.Once you borrow from the IMF it imposes strict conditions on countries that take out a ‘loan’ — for example, strict requirements that the borrowing countries cut their budget deficits.

Initially it was mostly European countries that turned to the IMF for help. But as you can imagine in recent years developing countries have been forced to ask for help since times are especially hard and with more countries going to the IMF for financial assistance its supply of funds is dwindling fast.

Because of this the G20 has decided that the IMF should have more money for loans. The G20 wants the IMF to have enough money in its coffers to triple its lending and ensure that it has enough money to offer loans to needy countries. New monies for the IMF would come from member countries. So far both Japan and the EU have already committed to loan the IMF $100 billion each.

Right now the IMF is trying something new, instead of waiting for countries to get into financial difficulties the IMF is now offering countries a line of credit to help them protect their currencies before they fall on their financial knees. Up until now countries were reluctant to ask for this kind of loan since the financial markets would get worried that they were a big risk and react negatively toward these countries. Mexico is the first country to ask for this kind of bridge loan and the stigma once associated with kind of loan seems to have vanished — another sign of the times. Most of these funds will be available to middle income countries that have relatively sound economies.

The G20 leaders also agreed on a revolutionary move that will give individual countries an additional $250 billion in available and accessible (liquid) funds. These countries would be able to create more of their own currency supported by the SDR or special drawing right.The SDR is an international reserve currency that operates as a supplement to existing reserve assets. This new initiative would give countries essentially free money, which they could use as they wish without having to negotiate deals with the IMF, and would do much to boost confidence among poorer and developing countries.

In the past Germany has been against this kind of assistance since creating money is inflationary. But in the current deflationary climate Germany seems to be lifting their opposition.

The IMF is also developing an early warning system for financial problems and taking a larger role in looking at the problems of the financial sector as a whole, in conjunction with a new global regulator the Financial Services Board in hopes of helping to prevent future world wide crisis.

In 2012 there will be another HUGE change at the IMF – they will evaluate their voting structure which could lead to the US losing its veto power.At the same time China (Russia’s cousin) and other up-and-coming countries would have greater influence.

It has also been decided that going forward the tradition that the World Bank and IMF must be headed by an American and a European respectively will be abandoned and will be open to any member state . In return China will lend some of its reserves to the IMF and China will also continue to lobby that the SDR will become a real reserve currency that will ultimately replace the dollar.

The changes to the capital and the role of the IMF are historic and perhaps the most important outcome of the G20 summit and it seems to me that this is a move towards a more global system of international finance and maybe a global currency.